To erect single storey porch front extension, single storey side garage extension and a single storey rear and side extension

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 11 March 2019 by D. M. Young BSc (Hons) MA MRTPI MIHE an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 21 March 2019 Appeal Ref: APP/Z4310/D/19/3223156 4 Gainsborough Close, Liverpool L12 9LB. • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr & Mrs Chris Owens against the decision of Liverpool City Council. • The application Ref 18H/1889, dated 5 July 2018, was refused by notice dated 28 January 2019. • The development proposed is to erect single storey porch front extension, single storey side garage extension and a single storey rear and side extension. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of a single storey porch front extension, single storey side garage extension and a single storey rear and side extension at 4 Gainsborough Close, Liverpool L12 9LB in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 18H/1889, dated 5 July 2018, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 17.14.01C, 17.14.20H 17.14.22H, 17.14.23H, 17.14.24C and 17.14.30. Main Issue 2. The main issue is the effect of the development upon the living conditions of the occupiers of 2 Gainsborough Close with particular regard to outlook. Reasons 3. The appeal property is a diminutive two-bedroom property which along with No 2 forms a pair of bungalows on the northern side of Gainsborough Close near to its junction with Newbury Way. Due to the curvature of Gainsborough Close, Nos 2 and 4 are positioned along a staggered building line with the latter being set-back from the former. 4. The Council’s concerns with the scheme relate to the flat-roofed, rear extension. According to the Council, the rear elevation of No 4 is already of 4.8m beyond the rear of No 2. The extension would project 5.9m from the existing rear wall increasing the overall distance of 10.6m from the rear of No 2. Appeal Decision APP/Z4310/D/19/3223156 2 5. Whilst on the face of it that sounds excessive, there are a number of mitigating factors. The boundary between Nos 2 and 4 is currently demarked by a 1.8m high timber fence. Relative to the proposed floor levels, the appellant argues that the fence would actually be 1.965m high. According to the appellant and as shown on the comparison elevation plan, only 85mm of the side wall and 365mm of the roof would be visible above the top of the fence. On any level that cannot be considered overbearing. 6. It is also germane that at its nearest point the rear extension would be offset from the shared boundary by approximately 1.58m with the bulk of the extension being sited over 5m away and being partly obscured by the existing side wall to No 4. Even on those occasions where the rear extension is seen, it would be simply viewed against the rear elevations of the larger two-storey properties beyond. 7. Bearing in mind this is a built-up residential area where extensions will inevitably have some visual exposure from neighbouring properties, for the reasons given above, I do not consider that the effect on the outlook of the occupiers of No 4 would be significant. Accordingly, there would be no conflict with Policies H8 and UD1 of the “Liverpool Local Plan 2013 -2033 Pre- submission draft January 2018”, Saved Policies H8 and HD18 of the “Liverpool City Council Unitary Development Plan 2002” or the aims and objectives of the Council's House Extensions SPG1. Conclusion 8. Based on the foregoing and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should succeed. 9. I have imposed the standard implementation condition as well as a condition to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans as these provide certainty. The proposed materials are set out in Section 11 of the Application Form, a separate condition is therefore unnecessary. D. M. Young Inspector